Intensive use of ICT in school: Developing differences in students’ ICT expertise

Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136 www.elsevier.com/locate/compedu

Intensive use of ICT in school: Developing differences in studentsÕ ICT expertise Liisa Iloma¨ki a

a,*

, Pirkko Rantanen

b

University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 9, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland La¨nsima¨ki school, Pallastunturintie 27, 01280 Vantaa, Finland

b

Received 14 November 2003; accepted 6 December 2004

Abstract The purpose of the study was to examine the development of studentsÕ high-level computer skills and competence (student expertise) in information and communication technology (ICT), and to examine the characteristics of such expertise. Eighteen lower secondary school students, selected to represent both genders and all school achievement levels, were given laptops for three years to be used both at school and at home. The data of the longitudinal study consisted of a test on ICT skills; self-evaluation questionnaires on ICT competence, thoughts about their own expertise, ICT-related activities and task, interest in ICT, and classroom observations. The results of the study indicated that the intensive use of ICT and the processoriented learning environment supported the development of student expertise. In the analysis, three groups were identified, which oriented themselves somewhat differently in relation to ICT: student experts (n = 6), advanced users (n = 8) and non-interested users (n = 4). The experts differed from the other groups in respect of especially focusing on advancing their ICT skills; they had undertaken ICT-related tasks outside the school, they had metacognitive consciousness about their competence, and they had future plans concerning ICT in their further education and profession. Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: Improving classroom teaching; Interdisciplinary projects; Pedagogical issues; Secondary education

*

Corresponding author. Fax: +358 9 19129443. E-mail address: liisa.ilomaki@helsinki.fi (L. Iloma¨ki).

0360-1315/$ - see front matter Ó 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.01.003

120

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

1. Introduction Recent educational discussion emphasizes the importance of encouraging students to engage in a process of progressive problem solving in a particular domain of knowledge (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Bruer, 1993; Hatano & Inagaki, 1992). Observations on young peopleÕs computer use indicates that children and teenagers are able to achieve a relatively deep understanding of knowledge and skills, meaningful to themselves, in their social environment (Facer, Sutherland, Furlong, & Furlong, 2001; Hakkarainen, Palonen, Paavola, & Lehtinen, 2004). There is a small group of (mainly) boys with especially advanced skills and understanding of information and communication technology (ICT). In many cases, these students form networks with others interested in ICT, they are ICT supporters in their schools, and they perform demanding ICT services in their neighborhood. The relatively advanced capability of young students can be seen as a kind of expertise, and it is often appreciated even by the adults in their social environment. The ‘‘expertise’’ of young people cannot usually be compared to the expertise of professional adults with both an educational background and a practical career in ICT, but it certainly has some similar features. In research, however, the nature and implications of the phenomenon have been seldom discussed (see Facer et al., 2001). The traditional research on the development of expertise indicates that expertise is a result of long and intensive practice, a conscious commitment and participation in the domain-specific expert culture (Bruer, 1993; Ericsson & Lehman, 1996; Glaser & Chi, 1988). Expertise is manifested in a consistently superior performance on a specified set of representative tasks for a domain (Ericsson & Lehman, 1996), and it is considered to represent the quality of an individualÕs knowledge organization. Formal knowledge is a base, which is converted into practical procedural skills and integrated with informal and situational knowledge and skills (Ericsson, 1996; Ericsson & Lehman, 1996). The knowledge base of expert students is different. Alexander (2004) found, within a school context, that in the development of studentsÕ expertise, there is a strong relation between knowledge and interest, and a distinction between domain and topic knowledge. Domain knowledge represents the breadth of oneÕs knowledge, while topic knowledge represents understanding of a particular topic or concept within the field. Those relatively new to a specific domain may not have a wide domain knowledge, but they are familiar with selected topics in the domain. To reach the expert level performance, individuals have typically carried out several yearsÕ deliberate practice, and they have undertaken training activities designed to improve specific aspects of performance. In particular, they have learned to monitor their own performance, in a concentrated way, so as to gain the necessary refinements of knowledge and skills (Ericsson, 1996; Ericsson & Lehman, 1996). Experts show a combination of strong motivation and concentration to reach high-level results (Ericsson, 1996). Similarly, the development of studentsÕ ICT expertise has a basis in strong internal motivation and in intensive use of ICT outside school; it is based on informal learning, and ICT resources at home (Facer et al., 2001; Hakkarainen et al., 2000; Papastergiou & Solomonidou, 2005; Sinko & Lehtinen, 1999). According to the sociocultural approach, expertise is a result and manifestation of interactional systems that include individuals connecting with others, artefacts and objects that comprise the social practice; it is a process of participation in an expert culture, and it is situational, reciprocal

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

121

and relational in nature. Expertise can only be understood within particular domains of knowledge, culture and social practice (Billett, 2001; Engestro¨m, 1992), and the domains, situations and milieux determine which experts are likely to have a particular interest and what contingent knowledge is relevant (Fleck, 1998). Several researchers argue that expertise can be considered as a role in a community, rather than being narrowly defined as mastery of domain knowledge at the expert level (Hakkarainen et al., 2004; Mieg, 2001; Stein, 1997). Parallel phenomena are, we may suggest, when a child or a student engages in the pursuit of in-depth understanding and mastery within a personally significant domain of knowledge, and participates in young peopleÕs peer cultures and communities of practice within digital media and ICT (Facer et al., 2001; Sefton-Green, 2004), or is appreciated within his local community as a tutor and an assistant in questions concerning ICT. 1.1. ICT competence and gender An important and interesting question is the connection between gender and ICT. Boys have better ICT skills, they use ICT more in their leisure time, their attitudes toward ICT are more positive than the attitudes of girls, they use ICT more for playing and recreational purposes, they are more interested in hardware, and they take on more independent challenges for learning ICT than girls do (Hakkarainen et al., 2000; Keskinen, 2001; Papastergiou & Solomonidou, 2005; Volman, van Eck, Heemskerk, & Kuiper, in press). Finnish girls at the age of 10–19 learned the ICT skills primarily at school, and secondly with the help of friends. Boys learned the skills primarily with the help of friends, and through working and practicing alone, i.e. learning by doing (Nurmela, Heinonen, Ollila, & Virtanen, 2000). Obviously technology still has a special connection with male culture. The culture of technological know-how is a set of socially constituted practices, and these practices have encouraged boys and men, more than girls and women (Clegg, 2001; Facer et al., 2001). Stepulevage (2001) noticed that the ICT competence was linked with the formation of gender identity. For a boy, it functioned as a construction of male-identity (also Facer et al., 2001, Facer, Furlong, Furlong, & Sutherland, 2003). It is interesting that the gender differences in ICT use and competence have not been found among younger children in the present studies (Facer et al., 2001; Volman et al., in press). It is, however, remarkable that the gender differences are dependent, at least to some extent, on access and training. School can diminish the gender equality by giving girls a possibility to use technology in combination with learning (Krapp & Lewalter, 2001). When girls have similar access to computers and they receive computer training at school as boys do, the gender differences in computer use and in computer-related control beliefs disappeared (Sølvberg, 2002), and they used the Internet as an information and communication medium to the same extent as boys (Papastergiou & Solomonidou, 2005). In general, the gender differences at school were also small in the use of specific applications, and girls liked a especially the combination of communicative and creative-writing elements more than boys (Volman et al., in press). We can suggest that girlsÕ ICT competence increases with time, and that they may reach a high level of understanding of and competence in, e.g. communication-related applications. However, a high-level technical ICT competence and motivation still remain characteristic of boys, similarly to the way in which technical competence has been gender-related in the past.

122

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

1.2. Supporting the development of expertise in school The traditional view of expertise as a superior knowledge base and advanced problem-solving strategies has been a model, even for school learning. Yet this approach has limitations, such as the lack of developmental focus, concentration on ‘‘coldly cognitive’’ attributes, inattention to learnersÕ purposes and goals, and too narrow consideration of the school context (Alexander, 2004). An important question for schools is how to develop expertise. Deliberate practice (Ericsson, 1996) supports high-level individual expertise outside school, and it includes well-defined tasks at an appropriate level of difficulty for the particular individual, informative feedback and opportunities for repetition and correction of errors. This kind of environment is highly personal and intensive. Such a situation of deliberate practice is difficult to achieve in school and, e.g. simulating deliberate practice in developing university studentsÕ informal reasoning skills showed that the deliberate practice – as it was conducted during 12 weeks – could make good performers better, but it could not produce the very best (van Gelder, Bissett, & Gumming, 2004). Several researchers have investigated the characteristics of learning environments that support the development of expertise. Students should use their knowledge flexibly to solve ill-structured, novel, complex problems aiming for deeper understanding; they should carry out challenging tasks with high subjective relevance and complicated representations of knowledge, and they should work at the limits of their capacity (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Bruer, 1993; Gruber, 1999; Strasser & Gruber, 2004). Experience in gaining complex competence is related to expert performance in real domains and domain-specific knowledge bases (Gruber, 1999; Strasser & Gruber, 2004). According to Hatano and Inagaki (1992), the conditions for attaining high-level knowledge are motivation to understand, dialogical interaction, freedom from urgent external need and appreciation, as well as understanding that is valued by the reference group. The instruction, as a combination of individual cognition and sociocultural approaches, should be organized around meaningful learning and appropriate goals; it should provide scaffolds to help students achieve these goals; it should provide opportunities for practice with feedback, revision, and reflection; and it should be arranged to promote collaboration, distributed expertise, and to facilitate entry into the discourse of a community of learners (Goldman et al., 1999). The metaphor of student-as-expert is intended to indicate that an ordinary student can, to a significant extent, have some essential features of an expert role. Considering the pedagogical goals of the school, this expert functioning is challenging for school and teachers. It may motivate and facilitate the development of some academic skills of the student, but it may also prevent to appreciation of and concentration on subjects in other domains. The focus of the study was to examine how intensive use of technology both at school and at home affects studentsÕ expertise in ICT, and to elucidate the characteristics of studentsÕ evolving competence in ICT. The present study is a follow-up study examining longitudinally student ICT expertise in the natural school and home environment from several perspectives. First, we consider whether students appear to have a well-organised body of domain-specific knowledge of ICT. This issue is examined by distinguishing basic and advanced ICT skills. Second, we consider the relationship of higher-order knowledge and skills to variables, such as metacognitive consciousness, interest and motivation to develop oneÕs own competence. This was investigated by analysing studentsÕ writings and answers to open-end questions about their skills, expectations and motivation. Third, taking into account the discourse related to communities of practice, we examined the extent to

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

123

which the student experts participated in authentic expert cultures outside their school, and the effect of their community of fellow-students on their developing expertise.

2. Methods 2.1. Participants The participants were selected randomly from a voluntary group of 54 lower secondary school students to represent, equally, both genders and various levels of school achievement. The research group then consisted of 18 students, of whom 9 were girls. In all, 11 students out of 18 had a computer at home at the beginning of the project. This figure can be regarded as a slightly higher-than-average proportion, since at that time about 50% of Finnish households with teenage children had a home computer (Nurmela, 1998). 2.2. Teaching arrangements The present study was a part of a laptop project, reported in Sinko and Lehtinen (1999), Iloma¨ki, Syri, and Lehtinen (2001), and Iloma¨ki, Lakkala, and Lehtinen (2004). The learning environment was designed to foster intensive use of information and communication technology, which brought about changes in the teacherÕs role, in the curriculum content, in learning activities, and, of course, in using computers. Within the three-year period, several teachers began to emphasize process working, authentic tasks, problem solving and inquiry learning method similarly as Hennessy (2000), Strandling, Stims, and Jamison (1994), Rockman et al. (1999), and Rockman (2003) reported in their studies about laptops. These methods often integrated several subjects, e.g. during the second year students carried out a 6-week, independent, cross-curriculum virtual study. Several tasks were introduced in the form of collective processes. The aims of these methods were to get students accustomed to explaining to each other as well as to teachers, and to sharing expertise in the working teams. The aim was also to get students accustomed to explaining, monitoring and evaluating their work and experiences; students gave presentations to the press and in conferences; they wrote evaluation papers, had visitors, and they were also interviewed for research purposes. During the last year, the students started to use in some learning projects a computer-supported collaborative learning environment, e.g. they learned statistical mathematics by creating and solving their own problems, based on authentic statistical data (presented in Sinko & Lehtinen, 1999). The learning activities in school were connected with ICT culture in three ways: First, the ordinary courses in computer studies, which consisted of the foundations of ICT; in the first year the students learned to use such basic applications as word processing, painting and spreadsheet, and they learned about the operating system and some principles of the hardware. Later on, the course consisted of more demanding applications, such as hypermedia tools and digital image and voice processing. The software was taught mainly in connection with other subjects and it formed a basis for the ICT activities involved in learning other subjects, but also for independent and informal learning at home. Students also had voluntary programming courses.

124

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

The second way learning was connected to ICT culture was through design tasks. The students conducted several open ICT design tasks during the three years; some of these were individual but the majority were conducted in pairs. The content of the design tasks was based on various subjects but the tasks were carried out using ICT applications. Examples of design tasks were hypermedia applications about cultural features of Biblical times; a possible, but non-existent European country, a description of Finland for elementary schools students, and a screen design about colours. The design tasks were not meant only for learning the ‘‘content’’ of the subject, but by designing and making their own products, students were active doers, not just users of ICT. The hypermedia application for elementary school students forced them to think about the needs of the users, and the screen design helped them to think about the usability of a hypermedia application. The third connection to ICT culture took the form of authentic ICT tasks. Some of these activities were carried out with people or organizations outside the school (homepages for the local church, editing a video, a multimedia application); some were for the school, scaffolded by the ICT teacher (layout of a school journal, building up a Linux-server, programming a problembased learning environment in the local network, homepages for the school). To fulfill these tasks students needed special ICT-skills and motivation because they conducted these independently within several weeks, mainly during leisure time. The tasks were linked to school via the ICT teacherÕs help and support. The tasks helped the students to develop expertise by providing an opportunity for sustained thinking over a longer period than typical school tasks, as proposed by The Cognition And Technology Group At Vanderbilt (1990). These activities were aimed at enculturating students into authentic ICT practices through activity and social interaction (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Lave, 1997). 2.3. Materials and procedure The data collection was based on a multi-methodological approach. Various methods were used during the experiment and the results of different years cannot be directly compared. The following means were used: – The semi-structured interviews (from 20 to 40 min) at the beginning of the first school year focused on motivation to participate in the project, beliefs about how to use computers in education, and expectations of the projects and experiences of computers. – A test measuring studentsÕ skills in using word processing, the paint programme and the operating system. The test was designed and carried out by the ICT teacher in one of the first ICT lessons in the beginning of the first year. The items tested the studentsÕ skills in applying the applications. In word processing, students had to modify a text according to given rules, in painting they had to modify a picture according to given rules and combine it with the text, while in testing the skills of the operation system skills students had to search, create and copy files. – A self-evaluation questionnaire (Questionnaire I) consisting of concrete Yes–no questions (e.g. ‘‘I can combine text and picture’’, ‘‘I can launch files’’). The contents of the self-evaluation were operating system (7 questions), word processing (7 questions), Internet use (6 questions), paint programme (6 questions), and hypermedia application (7 questions). This questionnaire was distributed in a lesson at the beginning of the first year.

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

125

– A questionnaire (Questionnaire II) consisting of 5 open-ended and 2 multiple-choice questions concerning Internet services. The topics were Internet connections (1 question), the use of Internet applications at home (4 questions), and the use of Internet applications in school (1 question). This questionnaire was distributed in a lesson in the first half of the third year, in November. – A self-evaluation questionnaire (Questionnaire III) consisting of 11 open-ended questions and 6 multiple-choice questions. The topics were assessment of oneÕs own expertise (oneÕs own special areas and competence of expertise in ICT compared with other students), future plans (interest in further education and future work related to ICT) and ICT tasks (studentÕs ICT-related tasks for private companies, organisations etc. carried out during the school years, the quality of the tasks, and the ways of obtaining the task). This questionnaire was distributed in a lesson at the end of the third year. – A structured self-evaluation questionnaire (Questionnaire IV) consisting of concrete yes–no questions about ICT skills: operating system (9 questions), word processing (8 questions), spreadsheet (4 questions), data base (4 questions), painting (4 questions), Internet applications (9 questions) and some technical skills, like installing hardware (3 questions). This questionnaire was distributed by the ICT teacher during an ICT lesson at the end of the third year. – Classroom observations by the researcher were conducted for one to two weeks during both periods; altogether 10 weeks during the three years. The classroom observations were used to describe the design and the context of the study and the teaching arrangements, as well as the classroom activities and studentsÕ participation in them. One special kind of activity that came to light through the classroom observations was the participation in large ICT projects. These were broad technical or software applications developed by one or more students. The projects were not part of any school task, and participation in such projects was voluntary. In all the projects some special ICT-knowledge and independent activity were needed. Participation in the ICT project was considered by the investigators to be evidence of interest and motivation, as well as evidence of participation in a kind of ICT expert culture. 2.4. Scoring and data analysis The semi-structured interviews were transcribed and typical answers were picked for description. The test was evaluated by the ICT teacher. The items were divided into three variables, based on the content (word processing, painting and operating system), and each of these was scored on a scale ranging from 0 to 5 points. Questionnaire I: The answers were coded by giving a ‘‘yes’’ answer 1 point and a ‘‘no’’ answer 0 point. The items of each content (operating system, text processing, Internet, paint programme, and multimedia authoring tools) were then counted to form sums of the variables. These variables were then scored on a scale ranging from 0 to 5 points. Questionnaire II: The items were analysed by classifying the qualitative data into a quantitative form. The open-ended questions (e.g. ‘‘what would you like to know better about the use of Internet services’’) were coded using three categories: 0 = no answer; 1 = one item; 2 = two or more items. The multiple-choice question about different Internet usage (‘‘What services do you use, e.g. send email to friends regularly/sometimes/I know but I donÕt use) were coded by scoring the answers of ‘‘regularly’’ = 2, ‘‘sometimes’’ = 1, ‘‘I know but I donÕt use’’ = 0.

126

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

A variable was formed on the basis of all questions, and the reliability analysis was conducted using SPSS statistical software. The Cronbach a was 0.838. The scores on the variable were standardized from 0 to 5 points. Questionnaire III: The items were analysed by classifying the qualitative data into a quantitative form. The answers to open-end questions were coded in three categories in the following way: 0 point was given for no answer, 1 point was given for one answer, and 2 points for two or more answers (e.g. The question ‘‘What kinds of shortcomings do you have in your ICT skills’’: 1 point = ‘‘I could be better in hardware understanding’’, 2 points : ‘‘I should know more about Perl, cgi-scripts and [I have] limited experience of Mac’’.) Irrelevant answers or non-concrete answers to the questions were ignored, but there were only few of them (e.g. the question about shortcomings in ICT skills: ‘‘You can always know everything better ’’). The yes–no questions were coded by giving ‘‘yes’’ 1 point, and ‘‘no’’ 0 point. Three variables were formed on the basis of the content of the questions, and the reliability test was conducted. The variables were as follow: Assessment of oneÕs own expertise consisted of four questions that described the studentÕs assessment of his/her own special areas and competence in ICT compared with other students. The Cronbach a of the scale was 0.916. ICT tasks consisted of four questions that described ICT-related tasks for friends and relatives, private companies and organisations outside school; the quality of the tasks; the ways of obtaining the task, and the possible financial reward for the tasks. The Cronbach a of the scale was 0.877. Future plans consisted of four questions that described the studentÕs plans for ICT-related further education and an ICT-related profession. The Cronbach a of the scale was 0.769. The scores of the scales were standardized to values from 0 to 5 points. Questionnaire IV: The yes–no questions were coded by scoring ‘‘yes’’ 1 point and ‘‘no’’ 0 point. The ICT teacher divided the questions into two groups: first the ones that concerned such basic skills that had been taught and often used during the three years (e.g. using columns in word processing or sending e-mails), and second, demanding skills that were not taught and used only seldom and voluntarily (e.g. using different picture formats or doing homepages for www). Two scales were formed: Basic ICT skills and Advanced ICT skills. The reliability test was conducted, and the Cronbach a was for the first variable 0.524, which was rather low, and for the second 0.855. The scores of the scales were standardized to values from 0 to 5. Participation in large ICT projects was coded by scoring ‘‘yes’’ 1 point and ‘‘no’’ 0 point. Students were classified into three groups according to the variables of the measures of the third year. Kruskal–Wallis U test was used to explore different student groupsÕ competence and orientation in ICT. Mann–WhitneyÕs U post-hoc test for significance was used for comparisons between the groups. SPSS for Windows was used for the analyses.

3. Results The presentation of result concentrates on explaining how ICT expertise was developed and how the development was shown in ICT skills, achievements, activities and plans regarding ICT and future studies and profession.

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

127

3.1. The development of ICT competence The first test of ICT-skills showed that all students managed well in the basic skills: in text processing and in the paint programme all students had the highest score of 5 or the next highest score of 4.2. The results in the operation system were more varied: 7 students had the highest score (5), 10 had 4.3, and one student had 3.6. The results of the first self-evaluation questionnaire about ICT skills were similar; the students evaluated their skills as rather high in the use of operating system, text processing and paint programme. There was more deviation in self-estimations of using the multimedia programme, and the Internet application, as is shown in Table 1. School tasks supported text processing and basic operating system skills during the first year especially well, because students had an intensive period of writing, mainly during the Finnish language courses but also in other subjects, based on the field notes of classroom observations. The first multimedia projects, in which students created multimedia applications in the beginning of the second term, brought to light both studentsÕ differences in ICT skills and their incipient division of labour; some boys helped others with technical problems and programming, and one boy helped with the visual layout. (Later on it was noticed that this boy had concentrated on the visual design and had helped other students with their multimedia applications but he himself carried out only one limited application with a multimedia authoring tool during the three years.) These boys with special skills and who were willing to help others were appreciated: ‘‘[if there is a problem with the computers] thereÕs a couple of real computer geniuses in the class’’ (case 15). On the basis of the researcherÕs field notes, we can infer that several tasks, which developed studentsÕ skills to create multimedia applications, increased the differences between students: some students avoided these tasks, while others produced 5–7 multimedia presentations during the three years. During the second year, the differences in technical skills between students increased. Questionnaire II in the first term of the third year showed remarkable differences in the interest in using Internet services. The mean was 4.9; SD 3.32, and min/max 1 and 12. A group of three boys with a strong technical orientation used Internet services actively (cases 1, 3, 6). They had the highest scores (4.6–5) on the variable, while the highest score of all other students was 3.3. The openended answers showed that, for example, the three boys used Internet connections at home daily, while the others used it weekly or more seldom; they were the only ones who sent email to friends regularly, and they used chat rooms regularly with friends and strangers. Because the Internet was not used regularly in learning projects, so was used mainly at home, this use was a good indicator of a studentÕs personal interest and motivation.

Table 1 The scores on self-evaluation of ICT skills Operating system Text processing Internet application Paint programme Multimedia programme

Mean

SD

Min/Max

4.21 4.88 1.25 4.95 4.17

0.64 0.37 1.19 0.2 0.75

3.57/5 3.57/5 0/3.33 4.17/5 2.86/5

128

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

5 4 3 2 1 0 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Case number Basic ICT skills

Advanced ICT skills

Fig. 1. The scores on basic and advanced ICT skills of the students.

During the third year, differences in ICT skills between students became stable and even increased, since students had quite a lot of freedom to use ICT as they wanted and to take on challenging tasks that needed special ICT skills. Fig. 1 presents the results of self-estimated ICT skills. The mean and SD of Basic ICT skills was 3.4 and 1.74, respectively and the mean and SD of Advanced ICT skills was 3.2 and SD 1.67, respectively. 3.2. Characteristics of studentsÕ ICT expertise At the beginning students were asked about their expectations of the project. They suggested several areas where one might use ICT at school, and seemed quite open-minded: the computer will be used very much, at least in Finnish language learning and in home economics weÕll do a cooking book. . . and then maybe in textile work we write everything in there, and surely in mathematic (case 17). All students were motivated to use the computer, both because of their desire to learn ICT and because it involved doing something new at school: ‘‘because for six years, I have been in an ordinary system and now something new and fun is beginning’’ (case 7). However, none of these students showed any special interest in ICT compared to others. Students had expectations about using ICT, and typically they thought that learning ICT would help them later on. It can be said that all students were motivated to use ICT, and they had high expectations at the beginning of the three-year project. At the beginning of the project, there were no signs of expert-like activities in school or outside. At the end of the first year, some few students acquired their first ICT tasks outside school, such as doing the home pages for the local church, which was perhaps a result of projects conducted during the religion lesson. Two boys interviewed the representatives of the local church for their learning project, and this collaboration led to the next one, home pages. During the second year, several students carried out ICT tasks outside school, mainly for family members, friends or relatives, but some also got tasks from private companies etc., for which they were paid, according to information obtained from the classroom observations. Examples of such

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

129

tasks were teaching the use of the Internet (case 7), word-processing tasks (case 13), small desktop-publishing projects (announcements (case 10), journals (case 14), and creating home pages (case 12). Three boys also mentioned technically oriented tasks, such as implementing software (cases 3 and 6) and working as an ICT support person during the summer holiday (case 1). During the second year, the division of labour developed among the students (e.g. one student knew desktop publishing well; some students were good at programming; one student concentrated on visual design). The reason for the division of labour was especially several multimedia authoring tasks but also a journal and special research reports, because these demanded (and probably created) various kinds of expertise: technical, visual, and skills in using some special applications. At the end of the third year, 14 students had conducted ICT tasks outside the school, such as support tasks or development tasks; 4 students had conducted none. The tasks were mainly for family members, friends or relatives, but some also did paid work for private companies or communities (cases 1, 3, 6, 10, 12, 14). Eight students assessed themselves as having exceptional ICT-related competence compared with other students; 10 estimated that they did not have any special ICT competence. The domains of the competence were concrete applications (PageMaker, HTML-programming, Toolbook) and technical domains (hardware, PC:s on the whole). One boyÕs answer was ‘‘in everything’’ (case 3). The reasons for their special competence were of two types, interest and activity, as the answers indicate: ‘‘interest’’ (cases 3, 6), ‘‘longitudinal interest and activity, enthusiasm’’ (case 1), ‘‘maybe I try and practise during my leisure time’’ (case 9), ‘‘result of practising’’ (case 7), ‘‘because IÕm interested in [multimedia authoring] and for that reason I have taught myself to use it well’’ (case 5), ‘‘I have worked much in the domain’’ (case 12), ‘‘doing layout of several magazines and publications’’ (case 14), and ‘‘personal interest in learning the topics and their challenges’’ (case 18). The students themselves appreciated this expertise, as one of the girls said ‘‘the usefulness can be counted even in money’’ (case 14). Six students had chosen the place for their further studies especially based on ICT. (In Finland students choose their further studies in the third year of the lower secondary school.) The concrete reasons mentioned were the following: ‘‘Because IÕm interested in information technology’’ (cases 6 and 9); ‘‘The future working places are in ICT and because of our family company’’ (case 1); ‘‘The future is dependent on ICT’’ (case 3); ‘‘The salaries are reasonable and the domain interests me’’ (case 10), and ‘‘IT is a challenging domain of work because it is developing rapidly all the time. It also interests me because I already have competence’’ (case 18). Eight students also had plans to study for an ICT profession. Four (boys) were interested in ‘‘everything’’ (cases 1, 3, 6, 9), and especially technical professions, four (girls) mentioned professions such as teaching (case 7), account keeping (case 17), media-related fields (case 14) and working with people (case 18). A special ICT activity, the large ICT project, was completed by 6 students (cases 1, 3, 6, 12, 14, 18). One of the students had participated in three large ICT projects (case 1), one in two (case 3), and the others in one project. 3.3. Students grouped by level of expertise At the end of the three-year study, the analyses of the data that were gathered during the last school year indicated that participants could be divided into groups on the basis of their performance in and orientation to ICT. The division was made using the statistical K-means

130

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

Table 2 The scores on the variables of the three groups Group

Mean

SD

Minimum

Maximum

Basic ICT skills

1 2 3

4.4 4.0 0.6

1.25 0.74 0.51

1.9 3.1 0.0

5.0 5.0 1.3

Advanced ICT skills

1 2 3

4.3 3.6 0.5

1.01 0.79 0.43

2.6 2.8 0.0

5.0 4.7 1.0

ICT tasks

1 2 3

3.6 2.9 0.7

1.20 1.73 1.43

1.4 0.0 0.0

4.3 4.3 2.9

Assessment of own expertise

1 2 3

4.7 2.8 1.3

0.82 2.05 0.50

3.0 0.0 1.0

5.0 5.0 2.0

Future plans

1 2 3

2.5 1.0 1.3

1.39 1.24 1.60

0.0 0.0 0.0

3.3 3.3 3.3

Participation in a large ICT project

1 2 3

Yes no no

Hierarchical Cluster Analysis, using a three-group solution and the variables Basic ICT skills, Advanced ICT skills, Participation in large ICT projects, Assessment of oneÕs own expertise, ICT tasks, and Future plans. The statistical analysis suggested a solution, in which 6 students formed one group, 8 students another, and 4 students the third group. The scores of the variables during the third year for each group are presented in Table 2. A Kruskall–Wallis test was applied to examine the effects of group membership (1–3) on the variables. The independent variable was group membership, and the dependent variables were Basic ICT skills, Advanced ICT skills, Assessment of oneÕs own expertise, ICT tasks, and Future plans. A Kruskall–Wallis test revealed significant differences between the three groups in Basic ICT skills (v2 (2, N = 18) = 10.21, p < 0.005); in advanced ICT skills (v2 (2, N = 18) = 9.93, p < 0.005); in assessment of own expertise (v2 (2, N = 18) = 7.68, p < 0.05), and in ICT tasks (v2 (2, N = 18) = 6.5, p < 0.05). Mann–Whitney U post-hoc tests showed that, in Basic ICT skills group 1 had a significantly higher score than group 2 (p < 0.05), and that both groups 1 and 2 had a significantly higher score than group 3 (p < 0.005); in advanced skills, both groups 1 and 2 had a significantly higher score than group 3 (p < 0.005); in ICT tasks, groups 1 and 2 had a significantly higher score than group 3 (p < 0.01 and 0.05), and in assessment of own expertise, both groups 1 and 2 had a significantly higher score than group 3 (p < 0.005). A more detailed examination of the answers to the open-ended questions in Questionnaire III, showed that among the six students in group 1, there were 3 students (all boys) with a special technical interest in ICT, i.e. a sub-group of technically oriented experts, and three students (2 girls and 1 boy) with an orientation towards ICT as a tool for their own creativity and human interests, i.e. a sub-group of socially oriented experts. All six students had a high level of self-evaluated

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

131

competence in ICT, and the technically oriented boys even had special technical skills, as one of the students wrote ‘‘I have several times been surprised when I have noticed that I can do better than our own ICT-teacher’’ (case 1). These students also had work experience in ICT outside school; the tasks were commissioned mainly by family members and relatives, but also by private companies and organisations, especially for the technically oriented experts: ‘‘Because of my skills I grabbed a summer job as an ICT support person in a company’’ (case 1). They had all participated in the large ICT projects. The students were conscious of own expertise, and they often wrote a detailed list of their competences and weaknesses. All but one of these students had the motivation and intention to study and work in the field of ICT in the future; the technically oriented boys were especially keen on working with hardware and programming. The only one not interested in an ICT profession was, however, intending to study engineering (case 12). This student showed a less deep interest in ‘‘hard technology’’, although he had used his laptop actively and was very skillful. These group can be called the student experts. The second group consisted of 4 girls and 4 boys. These students had estimated their ICT skills as rather good. They did not make detailed lists of their own competences, and they gave rather general answers, e.g. ‘‘ToolBook’’ or ‘‘multimedia’’. They also had work experience in ICT outside school, tasks commissioned mainly by family members or relatives, but only one of them was paid for the tasks. They had no special interest in technical features of ICT, but they were interested in using ICT as a tool: at least to me the computer has become a good tool and not a goal in itself’’ (case 7). Three out of 8 intended to work in an ICT profession in the future, but mainly in applying ICT: an ICT consultant in a hotel, or in a commercial domain’’ (case 10). This group can be called The advanced users. The third group consisted of 3 girls and 1 boy. These students had basic ICT skills but no special interest in ICT, as one of the students wrote ‘‘I know the basic skills and I donÕt think I need any more’’ (case 8). Another student compared his skills to those of his friends: ‘‘I think I have more computer-related knowledge than many of my friends. . . who have had a computer all their life’’ (case 2). These students understood that computers will be essential also in the future: IÕm interested in other things than computers. Of course, besides other things, IÕll also work with computers in the future’’ (case 2). All these four students also appreciated the use of ICT in school, and said it had ‘‘positively’’ (case 8) affected their skills, even very much so: ‘‘I hadnÕt even touched a computer before lower secondary school so it affected me remarkably’’ (case 17), and ‘‘It affected me a lot. I would hardly know anything about IT if I hadnÕt used a computer in school both independently and under supervision’’ (case 2). This group can be called the non-interested users. One of these students (case 2) had plans to study a profession related to ICT, it was connected to graphical design. The others did not have ICT-related plans. This boy was also a kind of expert, within visual culture. He had, e.g. helped the other students with the visual lay-outs and screen designs especially during the two last years, and he was interested in digital image (and music) processing. He was consciously oriented towards visual professionalism.

4. Discussion The study reports findings about the development of studentsÕ ICT expertise in a technologyintensive environment, both at school and at home. The ICT activities, which the teachers

132

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

promoted for learning, required and supported the development of good ICT skills. The intensive use of laptops both at school and at home helped all students to become proficient enough to function constructively in the emerging knowledge society: they all had basic ICT skills, a realistic understanding of the possibilities of ICT in the future, and they had learnt to use ICT as a meaningful tool. Rockman et al. (1999) noticed in a comparative study on students using laptops that laptop students rated their confidence in computer skills more highly than non-laptop users, and that their attitudes were more positive than non-laptop studentsÕ. The attitudes of the students of this study toward computers were positive, and they were all confident with computers. At the beginning of the project, these students (or their parents!) applied voluntarily for the class, a fact which must have affected in their motivation. The results cannot therefore be generalized to an ordinary group of students, even if the teaching arrangements are similar. The means for collecting the data were developed during the project: in the beginning phase, a practical development process occurred, and the researcher collected all data concerning students, teachers and daily ICT-related activities. During the process, the phenomenon of the study, student-as-expert, became clear, and the data collection became more deliberate. The researcher could also concentrate on making observations in the classroom concerning the question of the study. However, interviews with the students concerning whom they regarded as expert (e.g. whom they would ask for help) would have been useful during the three years. During the three-year period, differences emerged between students based on their orientation to ICT. At the end of the project, the researchers classified the students into three distinct groups, based on their orientation: student experts, advanced users and non-interested users. The student experts formed two sub-groups: technically oriented and socially oriented students. These groups formed over the three yearÕs of the project, there were not such marked differences between the students at the beginning. The student expert group (6 students) was professionally oriented, had especially good computer skills and used technology in many fields, had participated in large technology projects, had detailed opinions regarding own expertise, and had plans for a technology-oriented future. They accepted professional challenges by carrying out special tasks both at school and outside school. A sub-group of technical experts was also interested in both hardware and software development. Working in authentic projects was a powerful source of enculturation and helped the students to recognize personal strengths and weaknesses: a conscious understanding of personal (high level) skills helped encourage them to participate in challenging projects. The expertise of these six students may reasonably be called Ôadaptive student expertiseÕ; comparing it to adaptive expertise as described by Bereiter (2002), Bereiter & Scardamalia (1993), and Hatano & Inagaki (1992). Expert students conducted meaningful activities and challenging problem solving in new situations; their knowledge was gained through experience and readiness to tackle problems; and by solving complex problems, they generated more knowledge. The earlier complex problems became routine problems and they worked at the edge of their competence. The other two groups were advanced users (8 students) and a group of non-interested computer-users (4 students). The advanced users also had good ICT skills; they used ICT as they needed, but they were not as highly enthusiastic as the experts although some of them also had special interests in ICT. The non-interested students also had basic computer skills, and even some more advanced skills, but they had no deeper interest in ICT.

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

133

The other 12 students (groups 2 and 3) with fewer ICT skills and orientation but adequate understanding of ICT and the need to work with ICT, supported the development of the experts. They needed help, and thus they often gave challenging tasks to the experts. This practical appreciation and being needed by classmates supported the motivation and development of the expert students, and formed the basis for the development of situational, reciprocal and relational expertise. During the years, students formed ‘‘a community of ICT practice’’ with more and less competent members, and this community played the facilitative and supportive role envisioned by Bereiter & Scardamalia (1993) and Bereiter (2002). The students were connected to an expertise culture of ICT, especially through the ICT teacher, but also through technical support persons helping to maintain the local network in the school. It seems that especially the technical expert students were able to utilize this connection. The ICT teacher gave them special, technically challenging tasks, and they were accustomed to working with the teacher as junior assistants. This was presumably an example of deliberate practice in the school environment, at least for the students who formed the technical expert group. This combination of support and practice helped the students to emerge from a culture of teenage ÔnerdsÕ into a culture of young ICT-domain experts. The view of expertise as being a result of the individualÕs cognitive process does not explain the expert-like performance of these students, because their competence is still limited compared to adult experts. They may have profound Ôtopic knowledgeÕ but less Ôdomain knowledgeÕ (Alexander, 2004). ICT is a domain of complex knowledge and rapidly changing understanding, in which it is difficult to assess expertise, and e.g. Williams & Procter (1998) suggest exploring expert reputations in such a domain. In this study, the expert students performed in their social environment as experts and their expertise was appreciated by others. The sociocultural view does not explain the studentsÕ competence totally, either. Although the competence was constructed in social practice, with other students, family members and friends, it was also strongly supported by formal school education and traditional learning activities (as found by Sutherland, 2004). All the students also understood that the school-related activities and ICT teaching had helped them as one of student experts said: ‘‘It gave me the preliminary knowledge, which helped me to study the rest during my leisure time’’ (case 2). In addition, expertise is also individual in nature and has strong roots in the individualÕs interest and motivation. Expertise can best be described as ‘‘knowing in practice’’ (Billett, 2001), which combines individual and sociocultural approaches. However, these young experts also had important support from school education: first, the flexible and learning-centred environment enhanced motivation, and second, the formal computer studies, extended the knowledge base. The school context created an environment that supported both individual cognition and the forming of a social community; both were needed to foster the adaptive expertise. The number of participants in this study was too limited to draw conclusions about the ICT expertise of the genders. It is hypothesized that the differences between the genders in ICT competence, which have been found in previous research, were less evident among these students because of the equal access to ICT resources and intensive school training (as was found by Sølvberg, 2002). It is true that the skills and competence of all the students in this study increased remarkably, but however, it must be remembered that the technical

134

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

expert group of this study consisted only of boys, whereas girls with high competence were oriented towards human and social use of ICT, as well as towards communication and the media. For future research, it is a challenge to investigate the forms of ICT-related activities that support the development of adaptive expertise even in traditional subject domains; it is assumed that a combination of formal education aiming toward a high-level community of learners and participation in expert cultures supported by, e.g., virtual technologies, may also enhance studentsÕ adaptive expertise in several other domains, as Sutherland (2004) presented in her study. Expert functioning is a challenge for the school; how to support the development of expertise in a way that simulates deliberate practice, but at the same time secure the academic skills in other domains.

Acknowledgement The first author was supported by a grant from the Finnish Cultural Foundation.

Appendix A See Table 3.

Table 3 Scores on the variables and the classification into a goup of each case Case number

Basic ICT skills

Advanced ICT skills

ICT-tasks

Assessment of own expertise

Future plans

Participation in the large ICT project

Group

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

5 1.3 5 3.8 3.8 5 4.4 0 5 3.8 3.1 1.9 3.1 5 5 0.6 0.6 4.4

5 0 5 4.0 2.9 5 3.8 0.4 4.7 2.8 3.1 3.5 3.1 2.6 4.7 1.0 0.6 4.5

4.3 2.9 4.3 0.0 1.4 2.9 4.3 0.0 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3 3.6 4.3 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.4

5 2 5 0 5 5 5 1 5 1 2 3 1 5 3 1 1 5

3.3 3.3 3.3 1.7 0.0 1.7 1.7 0.0 1.7 3.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 1.7 3.3

Yes No Yes No No Yes No No No No No Yes No Yes No No No Yes

1 3 1 2 2 1 2 3 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 3 3 1

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

135

References Alexander, P. A. (2004). A model of domain learning: Reinterpreting expertise as a multidimensional, multistage process. In D. Y. Dai, & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Motivation, emotion and cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Hillsdale, NJ: New Erlbaum Associates. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves. An inquiry into the nature and implications of experise. Chicago, IL: Open Court. Billett, S. (2001). Knowing in practice: re-conceptualising vocational expertise. Learning and Instruction, 11(6), 431–452. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. Bruer, J. T. (1993). Schools for thought. A science of learning in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: MIT. Clegg, S. (2001). Theorising the machine: gender, education and computing. Gender and Education, 13(3), 307–324. Engestro¨m, Y. (1992). Interactive expertise: studies in distributed working intelligence. Helsinki: University of Helsinki, Department of Education, Research Bulletin, p. 83. Ericsson, K. A. (1996). The road to excellence. The acquisition of expert performance in the arts and sciences, sports and games. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Ericsson, K. A., & Lehman, A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 273–305. Facer, K., Furlong, J., Furlong, R., & Sutherland, R. (2003). ScreenPlay. Children and computing in the home. Lontoo: RoutledgeFalmer. Facer, K., Sutherland, R., Furlong, R., & Furlong, J. (2001). WhatÕs the point of using computers? The development of computer expertise in the home. New Media & Society, 3(2), 199–219. Fleck, J. (1998). Expertise: knowledge, power and tradeability. In R. Williams, W. Faulkner, & J. Fleck (Eds.), Exploring expertise. Issues and perspectives. London: Macmillan Press. van Gelder, T., Bissett, M., & Gumming, G. (2004). Cultivating expertise in informal reasoning. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 58(2), 142–152. Glaser, R., & Chi, M. T. H. (1988). Overview. In M. T. T. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Goldman, S., & Petrosino, A.Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1999). Design principles for instruction in content domains: Lessons from research on expertise and learning. In F. T. Durso (Ed.), Handbook of applied cognition (pp. 595–627). Chichester, England: Wiley & Sons. Gruber, H. (1999, August). The role of experience for gaining competence. A paper presented at the eighth European conference for research on learning and instruction in Go¨teborg, Sweden. Hakkarainen, K., Iloma¨ki, L., Lipponen, L., Muukkonen, H., Rahikainen, M., & Tuominen, T. (2000). StudentsÕ skills and practices of using ICT: results of a national assessment in Finland. Computers & Education, 34, 103– 117. Hakkarainen, K., Palonen, T., Paavola, S., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). Communities of networked expertise: Professional and educational perspectives. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1992). Desituating cognition through the construction of conceptual knowledge. Ways of learning and knowing. In P. Light, & G. Butterworth (Eds.), Context and cognition. New York: Harvester. Hennessy, S. (2000). Graphing investigations using portable (palmtop) technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16, 243–358. Iloma¨ki, L., Lakkala, M., & Lehtinen, E. (2004). A case study of ICT adoption within a teacher community at a Finnish lower-secondary school. Education, Communication and Information, 4(1), 53–69. Iloma¨ki, L., Syri, J., & Lehtinen, E. (2001). A Finnish pilot study in OECD evaluation: Scaling up innovative ICT practices – a case study of La¨nsima¨ki school. Retrieved 01.11, 20043 from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/46/63/ 2737860. Keskinen, V. (2001). Kiiretta¨ pita¨a¨. Kaverit, koti, koulu ja nuorten vapaa-aika Helsingissa¨ 2000. [In a hurry. Friends, home, school and adolescentsÕs leisure time in Helsinki 2000]. Helsingin kaupungin tietokeskus. Tutkimuksia 2001:10.

136

L. Iloma¨ki, P. Rantanen / Computers & Education 48 (2007) 119–136

Krapp, A., & Lewalter, D. (2001). Development of interests and interest-based motivational orientations: A longitudinal study in vocational school and work settings. In S. Volet, & S. Ja¨rvela¨ (Eds.), Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical advances and methodological implications (pp. 209–232). London: Pergamon/Elsevier. Lave, J. (1997). The culture of acquisition and the practice of understanding. In D. Kirshner, & J. Whitson (Eds.), Situated cognition. Social, semiotic, and psychological perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Mieg, H. A. (2001). The social psychology of expertise: case studies in research, professional domains, and expert roles. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Nurmela, J. (1998). Valikoiko uusi tieto- ja viestinta¨tekniikka ka¨ytta¨ja¨nsa¨? [Does the new infomation and communication technology choose its users?]. Katsauksia 1998/1. Helsinki: Tilastokeskus. Nurmela, J., Heinonen, R., Ollila, P. & Virtanen, V. (2000). Matkapuhelin ja tietokone suomalaisen arjessa. Suomalaiset ja tuleva tietoyhteiskunta –tutkimushanke, vaihe II raportti I. [Mobile phone and computer in a FinnÕs daily life. Finns and the future information society – research project, phase II report I]. Katsauksia 2000/2. Helsinki: Tilastokeskus. Papastergiou, M., & Solomonidou, C. (2005). Gender issues in Internet access and favourite Internet activities among Greek high school pupils inside and outside school. Computers & Education, 44(4), 377–393. Rockman, S. (2003). Learning from laptops. Treshold, Fall 2003, pp. 24–27. Rockman et al. (1999). A more complex picture: laptop use and impact in the context of changing home and school access. Available from: http://www.microsofht.com/education/download/aal/reserach3report.doc Retrieved 01.11, 2004. Sefton-Green, J. (2004). Literature review in informal learning with technology oustide school. A Report for NESTA Futurelab. Retrieved 25.09, 2004, from http://www.nestafuturelab.org/research/reviews/07_01.htm. Sinko, M., & Lehtinen, E. (1999). The challenges of ICT in Finnish education. Juva: Atena kustannus. Sølvberg, A. (2002). Gender differences in computer-related control beliefs and home computer use. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 46(4), 408–426. Stein, E. W. (1997). A look at expertise from a social perspective. In P. J. Feltovich, K. M. Ford, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), Expertise in context. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press. Stepulevage, L. (2001). Gender/technology relations: complicating the gender binary. Gender and Education, 13(3), 325–338. Strandling, B., Stims, D., & Jamison, J. (1994). Portable computers pilot evaluation report. Coventry: National Council of Educational Technology. Strasser, J., & Gruber, H. (2004). The role of experience. In H. P. A. Boshuizen, R. Bromme, & H. Gruber (Eds.), Professional learning: gaps and transitions on the way from novice to expert. Dordrect: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Sutherland, R. (2004). Designs for learning: ICT and knowledge in the classroom. Computers & Education, 43(1), 5–16. The Cognition And Technology Group At Vanderbilt (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher 19(5), 2–10. Volman, M., van Eck, E., Heemskerk, I. & Kuiper, E. New technologies, new differences. Gender and ethnic differences in pupilsÕ use of ICT in primary and secondary education. Computers & Education, in press. Williams, R., & Procter, R. (1998). Trading places: a case study of the formation and deployment of computing expertise. In R. Williams, W. Faulkner, & J. Fleck (Eds.), Exploring expertise. Issues and perspectives. London: Macmillan Press.